Saturday, March 28, 2009

Earth Hour



Tonight we celebrate Earth Hour, perhaps the most important thing that nobody seems to know nor care about.  A WWF initiative, Earth Hour's premise is simple: turn out your lights (and everything else that runs on electricity) for a whole hour, starting at 8:30 pm whatever time zone you're in.  It's a gesture more than anything, a sign that we at least acknowledge global warming and the effects of rampant energy consumption.  But few people know about it, and fewer still will actually go dark.  Some of us will forget, some of us will not be able to live without TV's warming glow for so much as an hour, and some of us will be nervous about giving to much power to the dreaded candlewax consortium.  But, at least, it's an effort.  You've gotta start somewhere.  Right?



Saturday, March 21, 2009

The Week in Review


So the Emperor Palpatine apparently hates blacks...who knew? I'm referring to Pope Benedict's recent comments on condom use, given at the beginning of his current visit to Africa.  In brief, the Pope stated that condom use will not stem the spread of AIDS/HIV, and that only abstinence can be used to stop the disease, in keeping with the Catholic Church's hardline view of birth control.  So, given the superstitious nature of people, especially the impovershed and uneducated, and given that abstinence is basically as fictitious as God, the Pope just got a bunch of Africans killed.  Listen to the Pope, catch AIDS and die: A equals B.  Now, I've always suspected that the new Pope was evil, I mean, just look at him.  And not the passive evil that has always been the trademark of the Catholic Church, but serious, Illuminati, Da Vinci Code style evil.  The guy was a Hitler Youth, after all; that sort of thing doesn't wash off easily.  And now, in keeping the Church's strangle hold on doctrine complete, the Pope is dooming people to slow and agonizing death.  Is it intentional?  Well, do you trust this guy?  Now, personally, I have differing views on the necessity of disease and its affect on human populations, but I don't wish a long suffering death on anybody (unlike Benedict).  But now more than ever, Africa, and the rest of the world, for that matter, needs to embrace birth control.  Populations are unsustainable, and in Africa, children are being born already infected with the virus, cursed with an early death from the get go.  Can we not say 'enough already'?  Can we not all admit that the Catholic Church is a particularly harmful form of nonsense?  Can we not all acknowledge the fact that the Pope is a sinister, wrong-headed motherfucker, and move on?  Please?


In other, happier news, the Obamas broke ground this week on an organic kitchen garden, to supply the White House Chefs with local, seasonal produce.  The garden had long been lobbied for by local food advocates, and the swiftness with which the President designated the garden after taking office is a sure sign that he's on our side in the fight for a healthier, more sustainable future.  The use of the garden to supplement the Obamas' diets is intended to show the nation an alternative to the fast-food lifestyle so many of us lead.  It's a clear case of leading by example: you there, you in the slums of east Baltimore, you too can grow your own organic arugula in your spacious backyard garden...wait a minute...  Let's face it, this garden is for show, mostly to make those of us who already embrace local, organic food feel better about ourselves.  Don't get me wrong, I'm pleased that the Obamas took this step, I think it's great, and with anyone else, attempting to lead by example like this would be enough.  But he's the President.  If you're concerned about the health of the people, sign a goddamn bill!  Outlaw McDonalds, close feedlots, change our national school lunch program to include a real vegetable here and there!  You can do that, you're the president, after all.  But don't just give us this little song and dance, as nice as it is, and call it enough.  Cause that doesn't taste like fresh, organic summer squash, that tastes a little bit like bullshit, and we've been eating that dish for the past eight years.


Also this week, Secretary Salazar announced that North American birds are in bad shape, with a third of all species being classified as endangered.  Sigh... Most people don't really care about birds, or at east don't think about them, small and flighty as they are.  Even a great many conservation minded people concern themselves primarily with the plight of the charismatic megafauna, the bears and bison and the like who are so exciting to watch.  But birds are an even more important indicator of ecosystem health, and people really need to pay more attention to them.  They are, pun intended, the canaries in the coal mine: if a habitat is in danger, they will be some of the first species to show signs of disruption, the first species to go.  Everything else follows.  Then, what we're left with is something that looks a lot like Cleveland, or northern Jersey, places devoid of any worthwhile life.  And no one wants that... 


To end on a happy note, I subbed in a vocational agriculture class this past thursday, and it was awesome.  I got to pet sheep, get my jacket chewed by a goat, get bitten by a rabbit, and watch a recently castrated horse get his temperature taken, the hard way.  I learned quite a bit from my students, like how to card wool, and that you should tie a string to the thermometer, in case it...you know...gets lost inside.  Ahem.  I highly recommend a little time with farm animals, before they reach your plate.  Because sheep are just plain cute. 

Saturday, March 14, 2009

Middlebury College: Sporting Wood

Middlebury College, home of my beloved Bread Loaf School of English, recently took a giant step towards carbon neutrality by opening an advanced wood-burning power plant, one of the first of it's kind in the US.  The plant is a fairly progressive innovation, yet one so fittingly New England in its basic concept, that Middlebury seems to be the perfect candidate for the development.  The college is at once the epitome of traditional Northeast liberal arts quaintness, yet also a leader in ecological thinking and conservation; who better to try this oddly retro concept?

Advanced wood-burning plants, which have already begun to take hold in Northern Europe, combust wood chips at extreme temperatures to convert all the carbon in the wood to flammable gas, which in turn fuels the continued ignition, leaving little smoke or residue.  While traditional wood fires, whose smoking chimneys are a Vermont winter staple, are in actuality horribly polluting, this advanced combustion method greatly reduces both CO2 and ash.  Because the CO2 released is effectively offset by the CO2 the trees soak up during their lives, the carbon foot print for the process is fairly small, depending on how the wood was harvested and transported.  It's not a perfect power sources, but it certainly seems to have its upsides. 

I admit to a healthy level of skepticism over the process, and can see several problems immediately.  It's difficult to find clear data on an amount of wood burned to power produced ratio, but this issue is key to the method's viability: do you have to denude an entire hillside to get a week's worth of power?  New England was once almost entirely clear cut, and few people, I hope, would like to see the region returned to that condition.  For that matter, I would hate to see all that land, particularly in Maine, that is so close to being surrendered to permanent preservation suddenly looked again but the hungry and destructive timber barons. I worry that advanced wood combustion might be the next corn ethanol, a idea that looks good initially but soon proves to be an environmental paper tiger.    

But, I also must admit, if handled properly, advanced wood combustion might be a handy solution to several problems.  First and foremost, it would reduce our carbon foot print, which is an absolute and immediate necessity that we're nowhere near dealing with effectively.  To that end, the process would begin to get us off foreign oil, hopefully allowing some of our more egregious political sins to be forgiven.  Finally, the method could foster job growth in otherwise poverty stricken areas.  The backwoods of the North East are rough areas, and a revitalized timber industry could provide sorely needed employment and livelihood.  Of course, I support the movement only if handled correctly.  The wood must all be fairly local, and farmed in a sustainable way.  We need no further causes to tear down the old growth forests of the world, and shipping lumber from Canada or further afield largely defeats the purpose.  It's also important to handle timber management in an ecologically sound way.  the rain-forests of Indonesia are swiftly being torched and leveled to make room for oil palm plantations, largely in service of the bio-fuels industry.  We must not be so blinded by greed that we raze our environment in the same way.

But, if scientifically guided, locally produced, and ethically managed, a revitalized timber industry could prove a boon, at least for a region such as the Northeast.  Certainly, I'd much rather have the Great North Woods returned to their pristine and untrammeled original state, but, more and more, the cause of conservation is an issue of triage.  If the forest must be developed to some extent in the pursuit of reducing global warming, so be it.  It's all a game of attrition like it or not, and we move not so much towards any sort of victory as simply further away from defeat.  So I applaud Middlebury for taking this important measure, and I can't wait to get back there this summer, and hopefully take a tour of the plant if I can.  I absolutely love the smell of wood smoke, I admit, but hopefully, the smell of no smoke at all will be even sweeter.  

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

Putting the Cart Before the Horse


Or, perhaps more precisely, putting the rocket propelled space telescope before the Asiatic wild ass.  

I'm referring, with this oblique equine aphorism, to the recent launch of NASA's Kepler Mission, which will use the Kepler space telescope to search for Earth-like extra-solar planets.  By training itself on our closest neighboring stars, and recording the infinitesimal dimmings that result when a planet passes between the star and scope,  Kepler will be able, over the course of three or four years, to determine which solar systems harbor planets similar to our own.  And, theoretically, such planets could harbor life.  Alien life.  For real.

Statistically speaking, life on other planets is basically assured.  The galaxy is a vast place, the universe almost infinitely more so, and with every new discovery, the concept of Earth's particular life sustaining uniqueness is swiftly eroding.  There has already been evidence of liquid water and (just maybe) fossilized microbial life on Mars, and that's a veritable stone's throw away.  The potential for life in other star systems has moved from the realm of science fiction to that of science fact with remarkable swiftness, and skepticism amongst the scientific community is readily turning to excitement at the prospect.  While the search for alien life is still very much in the first stages of its infancy, the Kepler Mission is one of the first clear and intentional steps in that exploration.  

But I'm afraid it's all just an enormous waste of money.  Well, not a waste per se, just rather a gross misuse.  I do honestly believe in the importance of space exploration and research; it's simply where the trajectory of human evolution and development is headed.  And, quite frankly, I'm excited at the prospect of what we may find.  One day locating alien life would explode the preconceptions of our entire species, and change our outlook on our own lives and our role in the universe.  But for now, shouldn't we concern ourselves a little more with life here on earth? 

Wilderness is disappearing, the climate is heating up, the ice caps are melting, species are vanishing, and entire ecosystems, hell, the health of the entire planet, is slowly but surely circling the drain.  That's not doomsaying, that's fact, and if anything, I'm putting it lightly.  In such a situation, how can we possibly justify an expenditure on something as ephemeral as extra-solar photography?  I can't help feeling like this mission is being undertaken for no other reason than to slake the curiosity of a bunch of astrophysicists.  And while the $600+ million price tag for the mission may seem like a drop in the bucket, given the state of the economy, think of how much land could be permanently preserved in trust with that kind of money.  With $600 million we might be able to save the Javan rhinoceros, or conserve sections of Brazil's Atlantic forest, or even just get that much closer to developing clean energy sources.  With so many problems at hand, how can we still justify gazing off at the heavens?

I'm conflicted, certainly.  I support our funding of the sciences, and I support scientific pursuit in general, but even I have my limits.  I want to be excited for the prospects of Kepler's research (though I admit I couldn't understand a lick of the raw data if I tried), and I want to be able look up at the sky with the same interest and intent as the scientists at NASA.  But instead, I can't help but look around at the glory and diversity of life on this planet, and wonder just how much longer that will be the case. 

Monday, March 9, 2009

One Step Forward, One Step Back


Today, President Obama took a significant step towards rectifying the sins of the Bush administration's science policy, by reversing a blanket ban on embryonic stem cell research.  Stem cell research has long been at the forefront of the battle between faith and science, and the Bush presidency's stance on the subject was perfectly emblematic of it's response to scientific progress in general: 'not on our watch'.  Any aspect of scientific research that either cut against policy or offended the fundamentalist christian right was denounced or denied.  Climate data was suppressed, environmental mandates were ignored, and across the spectrum, information was massaged and mangled until it supported political decisions which had no true basis in scientific fact.  It was a very bleak eight years, a veritable dark age of the American scientific spirit.  And now, supposedly, a new day has dawned.

The importance of the stem cell reversal should not be underplayed; it is an enormous move in the right direction, at least in one particular field, and possibly for the scientific community overall.  The argument against embryonic stem cell research is reactionary and  superstitious at best, and because of our government's willingness to cave into fundamentalism, the true and daily suffering of individuals was prolonged unnecessarily.  We're effectively eight years behind where we should be as a logical and rational nation, and we must not forget that this course of action has been physically and mentally detrimental to many of our citizens.  Stem cell science isn't a magical fix of course, but the regenerative potential of the cells is also difficult to overestimate.  Who can say what we'd be capable of today, had Bush not chosen the cowardly and illogical route?   

By officially reversing course today, Obama is beginning to fulfill what, to me at least, was the most interesting and important promise of his inaugural speech, the returning of science to its proper stature within the American government.  That single line spoke directly to those of us dissatisfied, outraged really, by years of willful ignorance by both a government and its people.  It let us know that a veritable renaissance was at hand, not just for those who practice the sciences, but also for those, such as my self, who simply appreciate the continual cause of human enlightenment.  Today's executive order goes some distance towards reassuring me that Obama was serious in his commitment.  And yet, at the same time, I'm given pause by other actions of the administration.

In almost the same breath as the stem cell decision, Obama's Secretary of the Interior struck a blow against the environment by upholding a Bush-era policy of de-listing the gray wolf from the ESA in the norther Rockies.  The secretary in question is Ken Salazar, former senator from Colorado, and the de-listing of the wolf places 'management' of the animals in the hands of state agencies rather than under federal oversight.  Such management will amount to little more than controlled extirpation, as cattlemen and ranchers are given free reign to scour the predators off the land.  It's a markedly non-scientific approach, one dictated by fear, hatred, and greed, and has no basis in good environmental policy.  The success of the Endangered Species Act for the gray wolf, years of protection and repatriation, has been undone with a pen stroke.  If what has occurred in Wyoming is and indication, what is to come is wholesale slaughter.  

Ken Salazar's choice to enact left-over Bush policy is indicative of his entire environmental outlook.  Though a democrat, Salazar comes from a frontier-minded, ranching background, and has long been a proponent of extraction based industries in the American west.  His cabinet appointment by President Obama gave many ecologists and environmentalists cause to doubt Obama's true commitment to reform, and the recent wolf decision shows that such fears were justified.  The disappointment of the Obama administration is its moderation.  It's not a surprise, exactly; politics dirties the cleanest of intentions.  But it is discouraging.  It's a sign that even in the most open and rational of recent times, every step in the right direction comes at a cost.   

Thursday, March 5, 2009

Sweet and Smokey Venison Chili


Today I have a nice little recipe for a chili I currently have bubbling away on the stove.  I've been fairly interested in non-conventional flavor combinations and using regional ingredients lately, and with this chili I've given a New England spin on otherwise Meso-American basics, using venison and maple syrup (trust me) along with corn, beans, and chipotles.  The use of venison is sort of unique to my situation; I actually prefer a version of this chili made with wild turkey, and the best choice might be pork, cubed or ground, as that would complement the sweetness well.

I'm not a big fan of spicy-ness, but I appreciate enough in a good chili to let me know I'm eating a dish that, by it's very definition and name, is spicy.  I use chipotles, dried and smoked jalapenos, because you get as much flavor with them as you do heat.  Chipotle powder, like a good smoked pimenton, is a fine option, but I've been using chipotles canned in adobo sauce (available in that deserted section of the Stop & Shop known as 'ethnic foods').  The maple syrup, which may seem an odd ingredient, provides sweetness with more depth than honey, giving a fuller flavor to the dish.  In this way, both defining ingredients serve double duty, combining to be spicy, smoky, sweet, and, um...mapley.  One thing to go out of your way for, if you can, is to buy whole cumin seeds, and toast and grind them yourself.  I've been surprised by how much more flavor this gives than stock cumin powder, but I am a lazy bastard at heart too, so at the end of the day I'll understand if you just go with store bought powder.  The corn is a personal choice, cause I like the crunch and have found that Green Giant makes a really great summer fresh canned sweet corn.  Even though it's off season, I find it's a nice touch.  As for beans canned can work, but ideally, dried beans are cheaper and more authentic, adding that gourmet smuggness factor you just don't get from canned.  Pintos or kidneys are fine, but I really like Great Northern, if only because I live in the north, and I am great.

Ingredients:
1 pound ground venison (or turkey or pork)
1 large yellow or vidalia onion 
2 Italian sweet peppers
1 poblano chili
2 cups (or cans) of beans
1 can of sweet corn
4 cloves of garlic
1 large can diced tomatoes
1 can tomato paste
1 heaping tbsp. ground cumin (or more, to taste)
salt & pepper
1/2 can of chipotle chilis (or more, again, to taste)
1/3 cup of real maple syrup 

What I love about chili, like stew, is that it isn't rocket science: soak the beans over night, dice and sweat the onion, brown the meat, put it all together and cook the hell out of it.  Bob's your uncle.  Variations abound, and I'm even thinking now that what this dish may really need is a bottle of pale ale to tie it all together.  In fact, I think I need one too.  If nothing else, I've always found chili is a good excuse to drink.  Bon appetite.  

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Water, Water, Anywhere?

I can say without reservation that water will be for the twenty-first century what oil was for the twentieth: source of wealth, source of political unrest, and source of violence.  Already, issues of water scarcity are becoming critical on both national and global scales, and the century has barely dawned.  Things will only get worse, as populations and consumption grow, and the potential for conflict over water far outstrips that over petroleum, given water's absolute and irreplaceable role in life, human or otherwise.  Even in America, land of plenty, we're not being spared the problem; just consider California's current drought, which threatens to plunge the state into fiscal and environmental catastrophe.   

California's drought serves as a crucial example of water usage issues primarily because of the state's role as agricultural superpower.  The three-year drought currently gripping the state has crippled farms and orchards, and it's because of their difficulties that the rest of the state is feeling the pinch.  Even though farms and crop production are in jeopardy, however, California's difficulties are not yet life-or-death.  Rather, they are monetary.  Crop lose is not an issue of survival, but rather of economic downturn; most of the farms suffering are citrus orchards, almond growers, wineries, and other luxury crop producers.  No one wants these growers to fail, but perhaps it's time to examine the cost of letting them survive.  Reducing consumption is a given. Taking shorter showers, watering the lawn less (for that matter re-evaluating lawns in general), and sacrificing bottling plants are all steps that should be taken, drought or no drought.  But how far will California go?  I've read ridiculous proposals online for building pipelines, possibly to Washington, because, and I quote, "it rains so much there anyways".  Worse, farmers are fighting for water diversion away from EPA mandated conservation projects and endangered species allotments.  It's an issue of blood money, ultimately, and whether life is worth more than livelihood.  It's an old fight, and one characteristically American.  Look north, to Oregon's Klamath basin.  There, at the turn of the twentieth century, farmers carved out arable land by diverting river water into otherwise infertile areas.  Now, years later, water rights have ignited a political firestorm, as environmentalists and local tribes seek to prevent farms from stealing away the last free watersheds, and possibly dooming salmon, waterfowl, and other local species to slow extinction.  

In America, however, the lives at stake are not yet human, and therefore still secondary to financial concerns.  Not so in the rest of the world.  Australia has been the victim of a decade long dry spell, devastating the country's agriculture, and resulting in the recent wildfires which claimed upwards of 200 lives.  China has so polluted much of it's rivers that the water is unfit even for industrial use, let alone human consumption.  The difficulties in Africa, however, still stand as the most critical and emblematic of the problem.  The mass starvations in Ethiopia are caused by drought and soil degradation, and areas of southern Africa have long been affected by famine for the same reasons.  The genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan, as much as it is a tribal and religious conflict, was catalyzed by water competition between agriculturalists and herders, and it will continue until water somehow becomes more abundant in the area.  Which it won't.  People will continue to die, in the sand, and in the dust.

How do we counter these looming water issues?  First, we need to critically examine how we live.  It takes something like 4,000 gallons of water to bring a pound of beef to the table, and the US annually consumes about 28 billion pounds.  You do the math, cause frankly, I don't even want to.  Now, I love a good steak, but that's ridiculously unsustainable.  And livestock use is the tip of the iceberg.  If I was a Californian farmer, I'd be out picketing every golf course I could find.  The requirements to keep a course green are staggering, and every year they proliferate, even in the arid southwest.  A golf course in Arizona goes against the very rule of nature; it simply shouldn't exist in such an environment.  For that matter, neither should Las Vegas.  The amount of water it requires to operate a city in the middle of the desert is mind boggling, and criminal, and eventually, someone will have to acknowledge the fact that people simply were not meant to live there.  And that's what it boils down to, wherever water is scarce: humans struggling to live where they simply can't.  As sympathetic as I want to be to those starving Africans, I have to look at the larger picture, and it's unpleasant.  They can't continue to live at the population densities they do.  All the relief we care to send not only postpones the inevitable,  but aggravates the situation by momentarily supporting unsustainable birthrates.  The situation is the same in America, if not so dire.  The farmers in the Klamath basin, the citrus growers in the San Joaquin, the blackjack dealers in Vegas; they need to go, or at least be reduced in number to sustainable levels.  As it stands, they are content to drink the water that's available dry, ignoring the harsh truth of tomorrow's coming crisis.  When it comes, and it will, the only thing remaining wet will be the tears.       

Sunday, March 1, 2009

In Like a Lion...



No single species, no single image, better symbolizes the resurgence of the Northeaster woodland than the mountain lion, Puma concolor.  It's still a matter of debate, of course, whether or not the cougar has actually even returned to the New England forest, but with more and more evidence and sightings mounting with every year, doubt is diminishing rapidly.  Most state Fish and Wildlife departments long denied the claim that cougars were re-colonizing the east, eager to avoid panic and the need for research expenditures, but recently, even here in Connecticut, environmental agencies are conceding that the big cats are indeed once again stalking the woods.  Some people suggest that the sightings are of individual escapees from private menageries or collections, but frankly this seems far fetched, and even more difficult to believe than the idea that cougars are simply drifting in through Pennsylvania and the Adirondacks, or down from Quebec.  And why shouldn't they?  Ecologically, there's nothing stopping them.  The forests in the region have re-grown to levels not seen since pre-colonial times, providing not only habitat for survival, but crucial wilderness corridors for safe migration.  Whitetail deer, the key prey species of the eastern mountain lion, have experienced an incredible population surge over the past few decades, as have less important prey, such as beavers, porcupines, turkeys, and racoons (not to mention livestock and pets, but more on that later).  And then there is the nature of the cougar itself, its incredible adaptability and survival instinct.  Even with it's numbers reduced through predator control, the cougar (or puma, mountain lion, panther, catamount, or any one of a dozen other local appellations) is the most widespread species in the Americas, save perhaps the introduced Norway rat.  The cougar ranges from the southernmost tip of South America up into the Northern reaches of the Rocky Mountains, surviving on armadillos, vicunas, pocket gophers, desert bighorns, jackrabbits, collared peccaries, elk, and nearly every other possible prey under the sun.  They survive in ecosystems as divers as the Sonoran desert, the Panamanian rain-forest, the Andean mountainsides, and the Los Angeles suburbs, all by being smart, secretive, cautious, and largely nocturnal (in large part avoiding the tragedy of becoming roadkill).  The cougar is a super-predator, a super-survivor, and without the constant pressure of human persecution, there would be nothing keeping the cougar from reclaiming its old haunts but its own inscrutable feline whimsies.  

Along with the cougar, however, come a whole host of difficulties particular to human-animal co-existance.  The primary source of conflict between pumas and humans has historically been livestock predation, and although this issue is mitigated in the Northeast simple because farming has radically diminished, the specter is still there.  Cougars will kill sheep, cattle, and horses, eventually, and it is the human population that needs to adapt to this reality.  Reparation payments for lost livestock will have to be a necessary compensation.  But people rarely have strong attachments to their stock; not so with their pets.  When people lose cats and dogs, a different sort of reaction is engendered, one often fueled by hate.  There's no easy solution for this conflict, no one wants their beloved lab made a meal of.  Again, perhaps it's now people's responsibility to take better precautions with their pets, keeping them on leashes, restricting their wanderings.  There is an upside to this issue: feral cats and dogs, themselves incredibly detrimental to the ecosystem, could be held in check, as could coyote populations (who are more notorious pet predators than cougars).  However, this is all secondary to the very real threat of an attack on a human, or even a killing.  Human predation as become an all-too-real danger over the last decade or so, as human habitation in the west has encroached on cougar habitat, and cougars have expanded into the marginal spaces left by suburbs and sub-divisions.  In Southern California in particular, there have been a number of high profile cougar attacks over the past few years on joggers, hikers, and bicyclists. Though fatalities are exceedingly rare, and statistically it's more likely to be struck by lightning, the fear of becoming prey is a primal one, and people react harshly to wildlife attacks.  Almost always, it's the beasts themselves who suffer, as the culling of trouble animals is an imprecise thing, as likely to result in the death of innocent creatures as it is the intended target.  Again, ideally, it's up to humans to change their behaviors or take extra precautions, as much to save cougars lives as to defend their own.


With all these attendant threats, it's difficult to lose sight of the true blessing the cougars' return is for those who care about the Northeast.  Though by its very nature the cougar can be dangerous, it is also a beautiful and bewitching creature, the most charismatic of charismatic megafauna.  It's a gorgeous example of evolution and of grace, tawny, lithe, as fluid as warm honey, as exacting as a knife.  It is perfect in it's own way, balanced by nature into a tool of its own survival, studded with sharp, hunter's eyes of deepest amber...it's too easy to wax poetic when describing such an animal, burning bright in the forests of imagination.  Yet it's more than simple aesthetic appreciation that makes the mountain lion such a fitting symbol of the rewilding of the North woods.  Scientifically, the mountain lion is a valuable part of the ecosystem , controlling deer populations and keeping trophic levels in check.  The mountain lion's return is also a sign of the overall health of the environment; severely unbalanced or degraded ecosystems would not be able to support such an apex predator.  That cougars are returning is a signal that the Northeast is once again becoming a whole and healthy region.  More importantly, it means we're doing something right.  It means that, through accident or effort, humans are making up for some of their past transgressions, righting some of their past wrongs.  The mountain lion is not invading, nor wandering haplessly in, but rather coming home, because we now have allowed its home to exist.  Even on a cold March day, with snow in the air and the wind roaring so lion-like outside, thats cause for celebration.